Worst timeline possible, this.
Yep. I can see some good may come of this late election cycle switch-up. Granted, I’m sure there are those within the malice machine that have been formulating a new set of lies, half-truths, distortions, misrepresentations, conspiracy insinuations, insults, slurs and disparaging language to apply to a non-Biden candidate, but the implementation will be trickier than the scriptwriting. The Gilded Turd will have to use an extra measure of restraint with his choice of new ugly nicknames else his rancor backfire on him (wouldn’t that be a delightful change of pace!). My guess is we will be hearing the tired old all-purpose adjective “nasty” a lot in the upcoming days.
I was surprised by this. I don’t know why really.
Yeah I think maybe they just actually can’t imagine a strategic advantage to being a man who can do something altruistic that comes at a cost to his ego or tarnishes his individual glory?
Like the idea that a man could get into a position of power while possessing that kind of personality is just kind of automatically rejected without curiosity.
But that’s the kind of skill a good leader should have, isn’t it? Like even a very strong and traditionally masculine leader ideally would be making decisions with the welfare of other people in mind to such an extent he might even ultimately act selflessly.
Oh I’m sure it does, many times a day. And that Melania complains constantly about the smell.
One of the best endings to a Columbo episode is at the end of Ransom For A Dead Man.
When he catches the murderer and she has a look of suprise when she realizes he set her up he says this…
“No conscience - limits your imagination. You can’t conceive of anybody being any different that what you are.”
That’s so true of trump.
This should be cued up at 3:15
If you read or listen to many of the pundits and leaders of the current version of Republicans, the common assumption is that anything anyone does is for advantage, in all cases. The idea that someone might do something because it’s the ‘right’ thing is derided as naive.
Work to accomodate refugees = Trying to expand Democratic voters rather than being, you know, humane.
Work to alleviate poverty = buying votes rather than being, you know, humane.
Work to improve education = manipulating children to make them Democrats rather than building a stronger country
Work to protect the environment = virtue signalling (eyeroll) to buy votes from ‘leftists’ rather than trying to keep civilization alive
Go to church = campaigning rather than being faithful or whatever
No action is seen as having a purpose in itself - everything is part of the ‘game’.
There is a corollary to the many, many stunted men who interpret and deride any man who says anything like ‘men shouldn’t abuse women?’ as a ploy to make oneself attractive to women. Rather than because we so obviously need to not abuse women. Not everything is a mating strategy, and not everything is a cynical ploy to gain power.
That’s straight out of right libertarian Public Choice theory, from James Buchanan and Gordon Tullock.
Yep. very true. they are cynical assholes motivated almost entirely by self-interest and they believe that all of us are just like that…
Economics. That’s the one that assumes everyone is a rational actor.
Lol. There’s your problem.
A Libertarian pseudo-science invented to justify privatization of government functions. It pretends that economic tools and how they are used are somehow not political, that political systems will always fall into corruption, and ignores that private companies will sacrifice long-term public good for short-term private profit, unless heavily regulated. (Which they are also strongly against.)
Hm. I should fit the “rational actor” part in there somewhere…
Thank you. I was wondering what that was about.
And another reason why humor works so well against him. He doesn’t find humor (not what most of us consider humor, at any rate) in anything, and so can’t understand or prepare for someone laughing him off.
I wouldn’t be surprised if part of the reason he’s still running against Biden is that it’s scripted. Not that he has a script, but that there’s literally a python script called “trump_tweet.py” or something that pushes the more coherent stuff to his twitter account.
The devs just need a minute to s/Biden/Harris/g the upcoming tweet database, but they’re exhausted from dealing with gay furry hackers rampaging through their files and Russian APTs offering them many Bitcoin for passwords of moose and squirrel.
What Trump, and other Republicans, are implying by this kind of talk is that the reason Biden dropped out of the race is because he, or those around him, have decided he can no longer do the job. So what he’s saying here is just, “Why hasn’t Biden actually resigned the Presidency?” I actually had an idiot on Facebook tell me that Kamala Harris is violating the Constitution by not invoking the 25th Amendment to remove Biden.
See also billionaires, most of whom got to be billionaires by thinking that way.
See also Margaret “there’s no such thing as society” Thatcher.
As we all know, your pessimistic-but-plausible projections of what might happen over the next four years are totally your diagnosis for today…
Also, isn’t remaining on office past your sell-by date what St. Ronnie would have wanted?